Staff Contributors
Guest Contributors

ADM, high-fructose corn syrup, and ethanol

A speculation about why ADM's HFCS business is booming.

Posted by Tom Philpott at 4:07 PM on 10 May 2006

In the first quarter of 2006, as I reported yesterday, Archer Daniels Midland somehow managed to boost the price of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) despite mounting concern over the sweetener's health effects.

The company booked a cool $113 million profit from HFCS over the quarter, more than three times more than it netted in the same period a year before ($33 million). This, despite a slowing domestic market for sweet soft drinks, as consumers increasingly switch to juice and bottled water. The company's official explanation -- "increased sweetener and starch selling prices" -- doesn't explain how it managed to make price hikes stick.

I think I've figured it out. And the explanation has everything to do with Brazil, sugarcane, and ethanol.

The fate of HFCS in the marketplace has always been entangled with that of sugar.

As Richard Manning shows in his Against the Grain (2004), ADM originally created a market for HFCS by ensuring that its corn-derived sweetener was cheaper than sugar. Manning claims that ADM financed the lobbying effort that led to the blatantly protectionist sugar-quota system that went into effect in 1982 and has held sway ever since.

For most of the period since '82, the world price of processed sugar hovered well below that of HFCS, meaning industrial users like soft-drink makers had no real reason to buy it. But by setting a low limit on how much foreign sugar can enter the U.S., the sugar quota jacked up the price of sugar for domestic U.S. manufacturers to well above the world market level. With the sugar price artificially inflated, ADM found a ready market for its HFCS. Today, HFCS is the dominant sweetener in the U.S.

Here is where Brazil, the world's leading sugarcane producer, comes in. As most Grist readers know, Brazil has responded to surging petroleum prices by ramping up domestic production of ethanol. Its preferred feedstock is sugarcane (which, according to Lester Brown, makes a hell of a lot more sense than corn).

Booming demand for sugarcane-based ethanol has spurred a dramatic rise in the price of sugar. (Which is exactly what biofuel critics have warned: The more food we burn in our gas tanks, the more we can expect to pay for food.) According to Reuters, "raw sugar prices, which rose over 60 percent last year, surged to a 25-year high of 19.73 cents per lb in February." The news agency expects more of the same:

World sugar prices are likely to defy gravity in the next 12 months as key producing countries churn out ethanol as an alternative fuel after oil prices spiked to stratospheric highs.

So here's my thesis: As the price of sugar surges, ADM can force Coca-Cola and other big HFCS buyers to accept higher prices, without fearing that these big buyers switch back to sugar. Brazil's ethanol program may thus be supplying ADM with a windfall on HFCS.

And here's another twist: Some U.S. politicians are calling for an end to the restrictive tarriff that protects ADM's corn-ethanol business from foreign competition. Brazil can produce sugarcane-based ethanol more cheaply than ADM can make corn-based ethanol. If the tarriff ends, Brazilian ethanol swamps the U.S. market and ADM loses, right?

Well, yes, but that scenario would also spur rising sugar prices and -- if I'm right -- mean surging profitability for ADM's high-fructose corn syrup operation. Some companies just can't lose.

That is some good writing there.

"If the tariff ends, Brazilian ethanol swamps the U.S. market.."

Some politicians and car manufacturers are claiming that we need biofuel to lead us to oil independence, while others are calling for an end to tariffs on biofuels. What is the diff between petroleum based oil and vegetable oil in that respect? Not all South American countries love us, and those that do, may not for long, especially if we decide to protect our supply of sugarcane-based ethanol by "stabilizing" the region.

And if the tariffs don't come down, we will all pay more for that fuel as a result through our taxes (subsidies) and at the pump. The government is getting itself into a bind with subsidy after subsidy and tariff after tariff. The free market is being turned on its ear to everyone's eventual detriment. I just hope they don't slap tariffs on Japanese cars to help our sagging car industry because the American made one I drive and the one I rented on my recent trip are both pieces of shit. Sorry to digress so.


In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

Genius...

Besides being a great piece of reporting and putting together some disparate pieces to create new understanding, this post reinforces something I've been noting more and more.

I'm fascinated and filled with hope by the increasing discussions of 1) Agriculture, 2) (truly) Free Markets, 3) Human Health and, 4) Environmental Protection all at the same time.

While these have always been tied up with each other, it seems that a number of current issues, including biofuels, agricultural subsidies, and the organic food boom, have crystallized these to some extent for a wider audience.

Andy

fructose

Check out this introduction article on Fructose:
Fructose

http://www.articleworld.org
More Market Factors

Thou hast no right but to do thy Will.

It's worth adding that, of course, the cost to ADM (and, from them, to HFCS users) is also being driven up by the surge in corn prices, driven by the irresponsible (corn) ethanol mandate, the aforementioned tarif on the more sustainable Brazilian sugar-cane ethanol, and the high price of a barrel of oil, which is actually enough to move Brazilian (and other) drivers with flex-fuel vehicles to switch from petrol to ethanol on pure cost considerations ...

Love is the law, love under will.

Strange

The history of America and sugar is long and troubled.  Your thesis is very interesting and this story is a great example of how government restrictions on trade have actually created the conditions for ADM to gain monopolistic power.

In the search for oil substitutes, the debate over "independence" and protectionism as opposed to trade is renewing itself.


Graph of sugar prices

Click here to see a graph of the average weekly international (i.e., pre-tariff) price of sugar (I.S.A.), in U.S. cents per pound, over the past two years. Once at the site, click on "sugar" and then "summary" to see a graph.

Having risen sharply at the end of 2005, and peaking at around 18.4¢/lb in early February 2006 (not shown on the current graph), it fell over the following year and stayed at around 10¢/lb throughout most of 2007. Lately it has been rising, and during the last week of February averaged 14.4¢/lb.

A trend is a trend is a trend.
The question is where will it bend?

These are only my personal opinions.

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
sign in
Search Gristmill
Subscribe
  • subscribe via RSSStay updated with the Gristmill RSS feed.
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
  • Subscribe in Netvibes
  • Subscribe in Google
Using Gristmill
  • What is Gristmill?
  • Posting rules
The comments of Gristmill users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?

Gristmill is powered by Scoop.

ADVERTISING POLICY


About Grist | Support Grist | Job Board | Archives | Grist by Email | RSS | Podcast
Gristmill Blog | In the News | Ask Umbra | Muckraker | Victual Reality | 'Tis the Season | The Grist List | The Bottom Line



Grist: Environmental News and Commentary
a beacon in the smog (tm) ©2008. Grist Magazine, Inc. All rights reserved. Gloom and doom with a sense of humor®.
Webmaster | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Trademarks